Gunboards Forums banner

1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Silver Bullet member
Joined
·
36,341 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Four years of learning Nothing? And the more elitist the college, the worse it is. As for American History - forget it. I was there when the 60's radicals, stuck in graduate school forever to avoid the draft, took over from the cobweb covered old poots of about 3 generations previous, and proceeded to have a competition on who could rewrite history the most. This began with "proving" that Truman staqrted the Korean War and ended with Professor (ex) Michael Bellesiles, author of Arming America: The Origins of a National Gun Culture, getting awarded the prestigous Bancroft Prize for history writing, later withdrawn when it was found that most of his research was falsified.


Washington Times
Lessons on learning
On Tuesday, the nonprofit Intercollegiate Studies Institute released its second annual study and found that colleges and universities are not teaching American history. The survey drew the same results last year.

The survey, a 60-multiple-choice question test given to 14,000 seniors and freshmen at 50 schools, covered four topics: American history, American political thought, America and the world, and the market economy. The subsequent report, "Failing Our Students, Failing America: Holding Colleges Accountable for Teaching America's History and Institutions," shows that the average college senior scored 54.2 percent — a failing grade — on the civic literacy exam, up only 1 percent from last year. Harvard had the highest senior scores, but a D+ average of 69.56 percent is nothing to be proud of.

Perhaps more worrisome is the data that shows how little students are learning while in college. For example, at top-scoring Eastern Connecticut State University, scores went up from 31.34 percent to 40.99 percent between freshman and senior years, giving the school a "value added" score of 9.65 percent. Likewise, at last-place Cornell University — which is dubbed "a giant amnesia machine" — student scores actually went down from 61.9 percent to 56.95 percent.

Both the 2005 and 2006 surveys showed a correlation between a school's rank in U.S. News & World Report's "America's Best Colleges" and its "value added" score. But the correlation isn't what you might expect. Indeed, schools that were ranked highest by U.S. News scored lowest on the civics report. Students at elite schools may score higher overall than other students, but they learn far less during four years of college than students at less competitive schools. Furthermore, the "more expensive a college, the less students learn about America," the report found. For example, private schools such as Duke, Yale and Princeton, which all cost more than $30,000 per year in tuition, showed a negative civic value added, while Murray State, Illinois State and Mississippi State, which cost less than $15,000 per year, all scored more than 7 percent in added civic value.

Additional findings show that family life has a very clear influence on test scores. Seniors who grew up with married parents who spoke English in the home did significantly better on the civics test than did other students. Also, "Seniors whose families frequently discussed current events and history learned more — and had higher overall scores — than seniors whose families rarely discussed current events and history."

Schools with higher added-value scores consistently require students to take more history and civics courses than others. The students in these educational institutions, whatever the school's ranking, are tomorrow's leaders of America. But how can they lead the nation without the full breadth of knowledge of America's history?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,161 Posts
I believe Paul Harvey mentioned this study on his radio show Friday. His observation was that according to the study, students at Harvard actually knew less about civics than they did before they entered the school.

Harvard, in one respect at least, actually made them less knowledgeable.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,811 Posts
I believe Paul Harvey mentioned this study on his radio show Friday. His observation was that according to the study, students at Harvard actually knew less about civics than they did before they entered the school.

Harvard, in one respect at least, actually made them less knowledgeable.
Harvey is being corny stupid again for effect! That statement says far far more about the "survey" methodology and Harvey's agenda than the school & student, you can't produce a survey if the subject is NOT taught... this whole "survey" sounds bogus. We produce some of the best historically relevent minds in the world out of these same Universities.
 

·
Diamond Bullet Member/Moderator
Joined
·
8,145 Posts
Harvey is being corny stupid again for effect! That statement says far far more about the "survey" methodology and Harvey's agenda than the school & student, you can't produce a survey if the subject is NOT taught... this whole "survey" sounds bogus. We produce some of the best historically relevent minds in the world out of these same Universities.
Or it just indicates that civics isn't taken seriously at Harvard. I can beleive those students forgeting a lot of the civics they learned in high school if they never learn any more at Harvard. And while Harvard may still excel in some of the sciences, I can certainly see the humanities profs using their positions as soap boxes to preach socialist communist nonsense without getting into any real civics.
 

·
Silver Bullet member
Joined
·
36,341 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
"historically relevent minds"????

They are taught by a degenerate system, run by incompetents. Traditionally higher education was stodgy, not particularly relevent to current events, but at least the staff knew what it was doing.

Today, thanks to the clump of 60's radicals finding a nesting place in academe and their vicious competition to get tenure and promotions, the liberal arts have come apart. Instead of the truth they teach their own unreasoning ideology, feelings, traumas, or their "shtik" - a vaudville yiddish term for a keynote bit of acting on which a comic hangs his whole act.

These academic fakes have sliced, diced and deconstructed the liberal arts to provide their own safe little turret in the ivory tower. They've splintered the curriculum to represent identity politics, not a broad cultural view that's relevent to our whole civilization. To defend their turf they have no problems with lying and cheating and courses full of irrelevancies and falsehoods have become standard fare. It's all too rare that their inventions and falsifications get them in trouble, as when Bellesiles got the powerful RKBA block upset by garnering so much praise, and the Bancroft Award, for his phoney book.
 

·
Silver Bullet member
Joined
·
36,341 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
That's a problem with MY education.

I used to have a Syracuse Tshirt that said: "Before I Came To This Skool I Kudent Even Spell Enguneer And Now I Are One"
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,811 Posts
The Sky Is Falling The Sky Is Falling!

"historically relevent minds"????

They are taught by a degenerate system, run by incompetents. Traditionally higher education was stodgy, not particularly relevent to current events, but at least the staff knew what it was doing.

Today, thanks to the clump of 60's radicals finding a nesting place in academe and their vicious competition to get tenure and promotions, the liberal arts have come apart. Instead of the truth they teach their own unreasoning ideology, feelings, traumas, or their "shtik" - a vaudville yiddish term for a keynote bit of acting on which a comic hangs his whole act.

These academic fakes have sliced, diced and deconstructed the liberal arts to provide their own safe little turret in the ivory tower. They've splintered the curriculum to represent identity politics, not a broad cultural view that's relevent to our whole civilization. To defend their turf they have no problems with lying and cheating and courses full of irrelevancies and falsehoods have become standard fare. It's all too rare that their inventions and falsifications get them in trouble, as when Bellesiles got the powerful RKBA block upset by garnering so much praise, and the Bancroft Award, for his phoney book.

hahahaha! baloney! and you only present one example! it's only rare because most are vetted extremely well... there are thousands upon thousands of sound treatise on any given subject coming out of Universities nationwide that stand the scrutiny of peer review, something you obviously know nothing about or have been subject to. "Clumps"? hahahaha where are these "clumps"... oh yeah that's right I almost forgot UC Berkeley and NYU!
 

·
Diamond with Oak Clusters Bullet Member
Joined
·
59,838 Posts
Peer review approval - one criminal helping another.
 

·
Silver Bullet member
Joined
·
28,833 Posts
I got an 88.3%

I am still attending a small college, the University of Maryland Baltimore County, and I want to give props to the instructors there, who are not liberally biased.

Pete Melcavage (who since has gone to a sattelite campus) for his kick-ass class on American Government.

Dr. Clayton Laurie, and I will let his reviews speak for themselves
http://www.coursereviews.com/u1007/professors/Laurie/Clayton
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Top